10/18/2012
Gary Francione on Philosophy Bites: Animal abolitionism is the only way »

Gary Francione means business.
Humane treatment is a fantasy, it’s on an epistemological par with Santa Claus, bunny rabbits, Easter rabbits and things of that nature—silly. Humane treatment is impossible.
Philosophy Bites is a podcast series of short discussions of philosophical topics (duh). On Saturday, they had Gary Francione come discuss animal abilitionism.
If we take seriously the notion that we ought not to inflict unnecessary suffering on animals, the first thing we ought to do is all go vegan. … There’s something peculiar about discussing the moral status of animals when we’re killing and eating them for no reason whatsoever.
I strongly recommend you listen to the entire podcast—it is just under 17 minutes and it is pretty invigorating. They touch on the delightful (read: obnoxious) mollusk question, how disgusting Francione finds the concept of “happy meat,” and the effectiveness of abolitionism versus humane treatment.
So, let’s get into it: Where do you align yourself? Are you more of an abolitionist, or a welfarist?
One more quote to stoke the fire:
The most humanely treated animals are subjected to treatment which would be torture, which we would call literally torture if humans were involved.
There’s much more! Go listen, and let’s argue about the philosophy behind our vegan lifestyles.
[Photo by Keven Law via Flickr]
∞ posted at 05:53 by seriousmeaveness ![]()
11/10/2011
Cookbook Reviews by Rachel: Big Vegan »
This is the first installment in a regular series in which Rachel gets opinionated about cookbooks both classic and new. If you’ve got one you’d like to see her cover, hit her up at rachel [at] zurer [dot] com.
Chapter 1: Eh
There’s a new vegan cookbook in town and it’s enormous. But as your mom always says, bigger doesn’t necessarily mean better, size isn’t everything, don’t judge a book by it’s cover, and get your elbows off the table (what?).
Case in point: Even though Robin Asbell’s Big Vegan is so full of intriguing recipes that I ran out of room for my little slivers of post-it notes, when the olive oil hits the skillet, the book doesn’t always deliver. Asbell’s instructions sometimes feel wrong, other times arbitrary, and don’t leave you with a sense you’re in good hands, despite her creativity.
Chapter 2: In Which We Get Deep
As Descartes once inquired, “What’s the point of a cookbook?” Or maybe that was Plato. Anyway, the question is even more important now, with the interwebs bursting with free recipes and people trying to sell you special kitchen-friendly iPad cases. Why pay for dead trees?*
One word: relationships.
A cookbook is more than just a collection of ingredients and instructions. Like an art gallery or record label (remember those?), a cookbook curates the vast world of possibilities according to a certain sensibility. Find an author whose taste you like (HAHAHA PUN!), and it’s like finding a foodie best friend.**
Except cookbooks go beyond curating. They also teach. And as sappy Hollywood flicks have proven time and again, good teaching matters. A good teacher sets clear goals and articulates the rules. A good teacher anticipates challenges and gives you the tools to meet them.
A good teacher is someone you trust.
Chapter 3: What smells like burnt fish?
I got a free copy of Big Vegan from Chronicle Books in September, and worked hard to test it as much as possible before writing this review. Some stuff, with minor modifications, came out great, like the version of “Lemony White Beans with Fresh Rosemary Vinagrette” I posted for Vegan MoFo and that both Meave and I found orgasmic.
I also used Asbell’s recipe for Avocado-Lime Cupcakes as the basis of my entry to the Denver Avocado Takedown. The Jamaican Tofu Chowder with Collards made a hearty addition to a soup potluck, and the Veggie Sandwich Loaves (bread with veggies baked into it) was definitely GOOD. And I should know, I’ve been baking bread like mad lately.
But here’s the thing: If I weren’t already an experienced cook, the book would have definitely led me astray. The Tofu Chowder recipe had me put the collard greens in at the end and cook them for just 10 minutes. I thus ended up with tough, icky collards.
The Crispy Sesame Kale was divine (KALE CHIPS!!), but the recipe told me to discard the kale stems. Seriously? You can’t give me a hint as to what to do with those besides throwing them away? (Hint: Put them in stock, or chop them up and add them to stir fries. For example.)
The Veggie Loaf called for “bread machine yeast”, with no explanation of why or what that was — I couldn’t find it at 3 stores, and finally used normal yeast, while ignore Asbell’s rising times, with good results.
Worst offense: The “Millter, Ginger, and Edamame One-Pot” called for adding a sheet of nori, “toasted and shredded” at the end. No further instructions. I put a sheet of nori in toaster oven. It caught fire. I put it in for less long. My husband walked in and asked, “What smells like burnt fish?” Against my better judgement, I added it to the food (trying to really TEST this, you know?). ICK. The dish was decent otherwise, but picking out shreds of nori made it way less fun.
Chapter 4: The Bottom Line
Other pros I should mention: A whole chapter on grilling (though I didn’t manage to try any); recipes for cultured vegan cheese (still on my to-try list); the paperback has flap at the front and back that are great for saving your page. On the flip side: The majority of the recipes are beyond-weeknight complicated, and many use ingredients I don’t tend to have on hand (shao xing rice wine? Kitchen Bouquet? semolina flour?). Very few photos.
Final verdict: This is a book I’ll keep using, but it’s not a kitchen staple, and I don’t trust it.
Overall Rating: B
Creativity: A
Level of Difficulty: Intermediate/Expert
Best for: Experienced cooks looking for a challenge and wanting to expand their repertoires.
*That phrase is going to be outdated as soon as someone invents the iTunes of cookbooks and it’s worth it to buy these books digitally. But I’m sticking with it for now.
**Maybe “guru” is a better term for it, since the admiration only runs one way (as much as I like to pretend Isa’s my new BFF because I follow her on Twitter).
∞ posted at 09:27 by reportingrzurer ![]()
10/04/2010
Clever readers: Use your brains to win prizes from CBC! »
CBC’s Q program had Jonathan Safran Foer and Anthony “my conjoined twin is my ego” Bourdain on to discuss eating meat; namely, should we humans do it? You can listen to the episode here.
Now they want to know what we think, and they’ve come up with a contest to encourage everyone to be especially smart. The rules are super-simple: Go to the contest page, and post your most persuasive argument for why humans should or should not eat meat, in one sentence or less. That’s it! The winner will receive “some excellent prizes,” notably a copy of Eating Animals, and Q host Jian Ghomeshi will read the winning entry on the air!
The deadline is Thursday, Oct. 7 at 5 p.m. Eastern (2 p.m. Pacific, you forgetful geniuses), and there isn’t any language about having to live in Canada or North America at all to enter or win or anything, so wherever you are, Vegansaurus readers, you really should give it a go! Just one little sentence! Go be brilliant for us.
∞ posted at 15:02 by seriousmeaveness ![]()
05/14/2010
» Animals don't understand death so it's fine to kill them
There’s been a good debate this week over whether people who don’t believe in any god lose anything by not believing; in particular, “How do you feel about death with no prospect of an afterlife?” For me and Kevin Drum of Mother Jones (linked), we believe nothing happens: you fade to black, that’s the end, and yes, it can be an unpleasant thought. The Christians and spiritualists on the other side of the debate contend that atheists lose something by giving up the comfort of an afterlife. The exchange is less about “does an afterlife exist?” and more about “is it better to live as if an afterlife exists does exist, even if it doesn’t?” I find the whole thing interesting.
Until I get to this:
But either way, does this really reveal something essential about what it means to be human? In one sense, yes: a knowledge that someday we’ll die is unique to humans (though fear of death plainly isn’t), and our response to that knowledge has been a defining feature of human cultures for millennia.
Is it? Is the understanding of death uniquely human? Like funerals or game theory or cities or tools or self-awareness or grief? Because the more we learn about how animals think, the more we realize how similar we are. What if empathy and self-awareness and fear of death are all pieces of the same puzzle? If the entire purpose of life is to survive, then why wouldn’t some base understanding of what it means to not survive be encoded in the DNA of every living thing?
“Only humans do this” is just another way of declaring our dominion over all life on earth. If only our kind and no one else is capable of considering death on any level, then killing animals for our own use requires no justification. Wouldn’t that be so much easier?
∞ posted at 10:24 by stevesimitzis ![]()
11/16/2009
Direct quote from Sarah Palin’s new book: “If any vegans came over for dinner, I could whip them up a salad, then explain my philosophy on being a carnivore: If God had not intended for us to eat animals, how come He made them out of meat?”
Hey everyone! Just in case you were wondering how Sarah Palin would behave in a hypothetical situation in which you were invited to her Wasilla meth mansion for a tasty meal, now you know. Also her book is going for NINE DOLLARS on Amazon right now. That is a discount of $19.99 off the list price. Not linking because, gross.
(via stfuconservatives, via timmelideo)
∞ posted at 14:38 by time-for-naps ![]()


